2000-01-09 IEEE 802.

16cc-99/21 R1

Project IEEE 802.16 Broadband Wireless Access Working Group

Title Base Transceiver Station Antenna

Date 1999-10-14
Submitted

Source Joel N. Holyoak, Ph.D., Voice: (972) 952 – 9866

Geza Dienes, IEEE Fellow, and Fax: (972) 952 – 0077
Michael R.Wolfe E-mail: joel.n.holyoak@andrew.com
Andrew Corporation
2601 Telecom Parkway
Richardson, TX 75082

Re: This paper is a response to a December 1999 Call for Contributions, for 802.16’s Meeting #5
(January 10-14 in Dallas, Texas). This paper is response to a update the paper presented at
Meeting #4 that outlined recommendations for Base Transceiver Station Antenna Pattern and
Mask equipment design parameters.

Abstract This document recommends the Radiation Envelope Patterns and gains for the Base Transceiver
Station (BTS) Antennas.

Purpose The purpose of this document it to be included in the appropriate section in the recommendation
document.

Notice This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE 802.16. It is offered as a basis for discussion
and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this
document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s)
reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein.

Release The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution may be made public by 802.16.

IEEE The contributor is familiar with the IEEE Patent Policy, which is set forth in the IEEE-SA
Patent Standards Board Bylaws <http://standards.ieee.org/guides/bylaws> and includes the statement:
Policy
“IEEE standards may include the known use of patent(s), including patent applications, if there is
technical justification in the opinion of the standards-developing committee and provided the
IEEE receives assurance from the patent holder that it will license applicants under reasonable
terms and conditions for the purpose of implementing the standard.”

0
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

Base Transceiver Station Antenna Recommendations

Joel N. Holyoak, Ph.D., Geza Dienes, and Michael R. Wolfe
Andrew Corporation

5. Base Transceiver Station (BTS) Antenna

The recommendations for the Base Transceiver Station antenna are meant to augment the overall system design
for the Broadband Wireless Access implementation. It is expected that improvements in the ability to create
improved patterns in the future will allow system designers additional flexibility. The maximum and minimum
values presented in this section are not meant to limit future design capabilities.

5.1. Electrical Characteristics

The two types of BTS antennas, sector and omni-directional, are considered. The specification focuses on
sector antennas because the application of omni-direction antennas is minimal and can be better served by the
use of two 180o sector antennas. At this time, the patterns have no differentiation based on frequency. Three
classes of operation are considered and involve low, moderate, and high interference environments.

Class 1 – Low Interference Class 2 – Moderate to High Class 3 – Very High

Environment Interference Environment Interference Environment
User Density low Higher highest
Overlap (with adjacent sectors) minimal Increasing most
Buffer Distance (between large Limited none
potential interfering cells)
Concurrent Signals smallest number multiple in each sector most
Frequency Reuse minimal, if any Some significant
Polarization Differentiation not required Important critical

A 0o reference direction shall be defined for each antenna. The radiation characteristics in this standard are all
referred to this reference direction.

The co-polar and cross-polar radiation envelopes for both azimuth and elevation shall not exceed the radiation
pattern envelopes, RPE(s), for the classes of operation in which they are presented. While an envelope implies a
specified maximum and minimum value, maximum and minimum values shall be specified as required to best
specify coexistence principles.

5.1.1 Linear Polarization

Only horizontal and vertical polarization shall be included in this specification.

5.1.1.1 Affect on Radiation Pattern Envelop (RPE)

In considering coexistence, the purchaser/system provider needs to factor the AZ and EL RPE’s into the
required coverage footprint. For purposes of consistency and ease of implementation, the ability to select either
horizontal or vertical polarization without the need for concern for differences in the RPE’s is considered very
important. Hence, the AZ and EL RPE’s shall be identical for horizontal and vertical polarized antennas.

1
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1
5.1.1.2 Minimum Cross-Polar Discrimination (XPD)

The cross-polar discrimination (XPD) sets the difference in dB between the peak of the copolarized main beam
and the maximum cross-polarized signal over an angle measured within a defined region. With respect to
coexistence, XPD is important not only for discrimination from interference within the local cell but also from
adjacent cells. It is recommended that the polarization discrimination be >30 dB.

5.1.1.3 Minimum Cross-Polar Isolation (XPI)

Specification of a minimum cross-polar isolation (XPI) for the BTS antenna implies that the antenna is a dual
polarized antenna. Practice is showing that these antennas are being deployed as single polarized units. Hence,
there is not a need to define the minimum cross-polar isolation.

5.1.1.4 Inter-Port Isolation

Specification of a inter-port isolation for the BTS antenna implies that the antenna is a dual polarized antenna.
Practice is showing that these antennas are being deployed as single polarized units. Hence, for those
deployments, there is not a need to define the inter-port isolation.

Should there be an application using a dual polarized BTS antenna, the isolation between the input ports of the
dual polarized antenna should be agreed upon between the equipment supplier and the purchaser in line with the
overall system design requirements. For guidance, inter-port isolation better than 25 dB is typical.

5.1.1.5 Antenna-to-Antenna Isolation

In practice, sector antennas are being co-located that are directed to the same sector. Such co-location involves
two primary configurations. In one case, there are multiple antennas mounted at the same site on the same
mounting structure that are directed to the same sector angle. In the second case, there are multiple antennas
mounted at the same site on different mounting structures that are directed to the same sector.

Antenna-to-antenna isolation is dependent on factors like site location, mounting configurations, and other
system level issues. Even with seemingly uncontrollable factors, there is a need for isolation between the
antennas directed to the same sector. For guidance, the antenna-to-antenna isolation for antennas which are co-
pointed to the same sector with sector sizes of 90o and less should be minimally 60 dB.

2
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.2 Radiation Pattern Envelop (RPE)

5.1.2.1 Azimuth Radiation Pattern Envelopes, Sectored

The azimuth radiation pattern envelope is specified in terms a variable α that is ½ the 3 dB beamwidth of the
antenna. Sector sizes for these RPE tables range from 15o to 135o. A 180o sector will be considered a special
case for use in generation of an omni-directional antenna pattern.

5.1.2.1.1 Class 1 Azimuth RPE

A Class 1 implementation involves a low interference environment. For this case, it is assumed that the antenna
pattern of the sector antenna need not be as tight as for a higher interference environment.

5.1.2.1.1.1 Class 1 - Co-Polar Azimuth

The effect of azimuth on improved coexistence involves increasing the steepness of the sidelobe so that there is
reduced overlap of the adjacent sectors. While other authorities’ specifications specify less steepness in the roll-
off, existing technology shows that increased steepness can be achieved. This recommendation promotes the
improved technology capabilities and encourages further improvements.

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth:

Angle ETSI Recommended Recommended

off-boresight Recommended Maximum Minimum Relative
o
Maximum Relative Gain dB Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 0 0 -3
α 0 -3
α+5 0 -5
2*α -10
(2 * α) + 5 -10
135 -12
3*α -20
155 -15 -25
180 -25 -25

A minimum gain is included to guarantee illumination within the sector. Elimination of nulls helps to keep
remote stations from needing the base station to transmit using excess power that could affect coexistence.

Note: ETSI values have been included for comparison purposes only and will be excluded when the document
is finalized.

3
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.2.1.1.2 Class 1 - Cross-Polar Azimuth

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth

Angle ETSI Recommended

off-boresight Recommended Maximum
o
Maximum Relative Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 -22 -22
α -22 -25
α + 15 -25
3*α -25
180 -25 -25

4
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.2.1.2 Class 2 Azimuth RPE

A Class 2 implementation involves a moderate to high interference environment. For this case, it is assumed
that the antenna pattern of the sector antenna needs to be as tight as possible to limit interference.

5.1.2.1.2.1 Class 2 - Co-Polar Azimuth

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth:

Angle ETSI Recommended Recommended

off-boresight Recommended Maximum Minimum Relative
o
Maximum Relative Gain dB Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 0 0 -5
α-5 -5
α 0
α+5 0
α + 15 -20
2*α -20
110 -23
3*α -30
140 -35
155 -30
180 -35 -30

5.1.2.1.2.2 Class 2 - Cross-Polar Azimuth

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth

Angle ETSI Recommended

off-boresight Recommended Maximum
o
Relative Gain dB Relative Gain dB
0 0 -25
α -25 -30
α + 15 -30
105 -30
140 -35
3*α -30
180 -35 -30

5
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1
5.1.2.1.2.3 Class 2 – Flat Pattern Considerations

There has been some discussion on the need for a different type of pattern architecture. This architecture
provides for a flat pattern throughout the half power azimuth beamwidth. The argument to include a flat-top
pattern leads to a discussion of the type of cell architectures that will be deployed. The flat-top pattern is
optimized for a circular cell architecture. It has equal power along the radius of the circular cell. The following
figure shows the 90o sectorized circular cell architecture.

Sector 1 Sector 2

Sector 4 Sector 3

The signal strength around the perimeter would be approximately constant under ideal conditions.

A sector design which has patterns similar to those proposed here has ± α as the 3-dB points is better optimized
for a square cell structure as shown in the following figure which also has 90o secorization.

Sector 1 Sector 2

Sector 3 Sector 4

In this case, the distance to the corner is farther than the distance to the sector edge. The proposed pattern better
fills the square. In terms of coexistence, the use of a square cell structure would tend to mitigate overlap regions
and reduce potential adjacent cell interference.

5.1.2.1.3 Class 3 Azimuth RPE

A Class 3 implementation involves a very high interference environment. For this case, it is assumed that the
antenna pattern of the sector antenna needs to be tighter than achieved for Class 2 in order to limit interference.
This class is the most important with respect to steepness of the slope at values greater than α. In previous
classes, recommended maximum relative gain values were specified at integer multiples of α and at specified
angle values added to integer multiples of α. This latter specification has a more pronounced effect at α = 15o
than, for example, α = 45o for a value specified for angle α + no where n = 5, 10, 15. Because of the greater
possibilities of interference in Class 3 in adjacent sectors, it is recommended that fixed differences from integer
multiples of α not be used but instead multiples including fractional multiples of α be used. The values
specified here will need to be modified should improved techniques allow for realizable steeper slopes at the
sector boundaries.

6
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1
5.1.2.1.3.1 Class 3 - Co-Polar Azimuth

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth:

Angle Recommended Recommended

off-boresight Maximum Minimum Relative
o
Relative Gain dB Gain dB
0 0 -7
α 3
1.1 * α
1.3 * α -25
2*α -29
3*α -35
155 -35
180 -35

5.1.2.1.3.2 Class 3 - Cross-Polar Azimuth

In terms of α, where α equals ½ the 3 dB beamwidth:

Angle Recommended
off-boresight Maximum
o
Relative Gain dB
0 -27
α -33
3*α -33
180 -33

7
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.2.2 Elevation Radiation Pattern Envelopes, Sectored

5.1.2.2.1 Coexistence Issues

Based on a cursory look at the coexistence issues of an elevation radiation pattern, it might appear that the
envelope needs only be defined for the angles above the horizon. In other authorities’ specifications, this
practice is observed. In other sections of this document, system aspects of power control and rain fade
attenuation are considered which need certain gains for the angles below the horizon. It is proposed that the
maximum radiation pattern envelope be defined above the horizon and the minimum radiation pattern envelope
be defined below the horizon. In addition, informative information on the maximum radiation pattern envelope
will be given for angles below the horizon.

5.1.2.2.2 Reference Directions

This specification will follow accepted practices for the specification of elevation radiation pattern envelopes
that provide for the 0o angle to be directed overhead, the 90o angle directed at the horizon, and the 180o angle
directed downward.

5.1.2.2.3 Class 1 Elevation RPE.

A Class 1 implementation involves a low interference environment. For this case, it is assumed that the antenna
pattern of the sector antenna need not be as tight as for a higher interference environment.

5.1.2.2.3.1 Class 1 - Co-Polar Elevation

Above the peak of the elevation beam (Note: takes into account that beam tilt may be used):

Angle ETSI Recommended

o
Recommended Maximum Relative
Maximum Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 -25 -30
50 -30
65 -20
70 -20
75 -15
83 -3
86 0
90 0

8
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

Below peak of the elevation beam (Note: takes into account that beam tilt may be used).

Angle Recommended
o
Minimum Relative
Gain dB
90 -3
94 -3
110 -32
130 -80
180 -80

The specification of the minimum gain below the horizon helps to eliminate nulls in pattern that could result in
the use of additional power that could affect coexistence.

5.1.2.2.3.2 Class 1 - Cross-Polar Elevation

Angle ETSI Recommended

o
Recommended Maximum Relative
Maximum Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 -22 -22
180 -25 -25

Use linear interpolation between limits.

9
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.2.2.4 Class 2 Elevation RPE

A Class 2 implementation involves a moderate to high interference environment. For this case, it is assumed
that the antenna pattern of the sector antenna needs to be as tight as possible to limit interference.

5.1.2.2.4.1 Class 2 - Co-Polar Elevation

Above peak of the elevation beam:

Angle ETSI Recommended

o
Recommended Maximum Relative
Maximum Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 -25 -33
65 -33
73 -27
75 -15
86.7 -14
88.7 -2
89.4 0
90 0 0

Below peak of the elevation beam:

Angle Recommended
o
Minimum Relative
Gain dB
90
90.3 -0.5
90.8 -2
91.3 -4
93 -17
95 -22
100 -22
109.5 -28
116 -28
117.5 -33
120 -33
120 -80

10
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1
5.1.2.2.4.2 Class 2 - Cross-Polar Elevation

Angle ETSI Recommended

o
Recommended Maximum Relative
Maximum Gain dB
Relative Gain dB
0 -25 -25
180 -35 -35

Use linear interpolation between limits.

5.1.2.2.5 Class 3 Elevation RPE

A Class 3 implementation involves a very high interference environment. Clearly, the elevation pattern can and
must be used to reduce interference to satellites. The characteristics of the Class 2 antenna appear sufficient to
eliminate interference with satellites. The use of elevation for discrimination between adjacent cells by
narrowing the elevation beamwidth of the antenna is questionable. For example, with a tower height of 60 m
and a cell radius of 5 km, the angle to the cell edge is about 0.688o down from the horizon. The angle to the
center of a same size adjacent cell is about 0.344o down from the horizon. Hence, there is only 0.344o
difference for discrimination from the edge of the cell to the center of the adjacent cell. Implementations for
sector antennas achieve elevation beamwidths of about 1.5o to 3o. Because it is not possible to achieve better
interference performance with adjacent cells by the use of the elevation patterns, the Class 2 RPE limits shall be
used also in Class 3.

5.1.2.2.5.1 Class 3 - Co-Polar Elevation

See Class 2 values.

5.1.2.2.5.2 Class 3 - Cross-Polar Elevation

See Class 2 values.

5.1.2.3 Elevation Radiation Pattern Envelopes, Omni-Directional

In review of the available omni-directional antennas for these frequency ranges, there are a limited number of
true omni-directional antennas. These units have a restricted mounting characteristic in that they need to be at
the top of the mounting structure and cannot accept blockage associated with mounting the antenna on the side
of the mounting structure. To avoid these mounting limitations, omni-directional patterns are formed by the use
of multiple sector antennas. To minimize the complexity in mounting and the resulting differences in RPE’s
based on mounting, it is recommended that a omni-directional pattern be formed by mounting two 180o sector
antennas in a back-to-back configuration. It should be noted that when two 180o sector antennas are used to
emulate an omni-directional antenna, typically different polarizations are used for the two antennas. Hence, the
polarization of a true omni-directional antenna will not be the same with respect to polarization for the two
back-to-back antennas. Likewise, there will be some overlap of the two patterns that will result in different RPE
values in the overlap region.

11
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.1.3 Minimum Boresight Gain

The BTS sector antenna boresight gain shall exceed the boundaries defined in the following table for all
frequencies in the specified frequency range.

Sector Angle ETSI Specified Recommended Recommended Recommended

Degrees Boresight Minimum Boresight Boresight Boresight
Gain dB Minimum Gain Minimum Gain Minimum Gain
Class 1 - dBi Class 2 – dBi Class 3 - dBi
15 16
30 15.5
45 14.5 18 20.8 23.5
60 13.5
90 12.5 15 18 21
135 11
180 9.5 12 15 18

Note: The gains presented in the table above are affected by the antenna efficiency. For guidance, the
difference between antenna directivity and gain should not exceed 1 dB.

5.1.4 VSWR

The maximum VSWR should be agreed upon between the equipment supplier and purchaser in line with the
overall system design requirements. For guidance, antennas with a VSWR in the range of 1.9 to 1.1 are
practical with 1.5 being the typical value.

5.1.5 Passive Intermodulation (PIM)

Co-location is one of the factors that contributes to Passive Intermodulation (PIM) performance. Non-TDMA
Point to Multi-Point (P-MP) access methods also affect PIM performance of the antenna due to the number of
simultaneous carriers which need to be taken into account. In such cases, a passive intermodulation
performance should be agreed upon between the equipment supplier and purchaser in line with the overall
system design requirements. For guidance, PIM product limits can often exceed –100 dBc.

12
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.2. Mechanical Characteristics

5.2.1 Temperature and Humidity

The antennas shall be designed to operate within a temperature range of –45oC to +45oC with relative humidity
from 1 to 100%.

5.2.2 Wind and Ice Loading

Wind loading as specified in this document for the BTS relates to mechanical deformations that would cause the
radiated pattern to be altered and, hence, affect the coexistence characteristics. Ice loading as specified in this
document for the BTS relates to the electro/mechanical effects that would case the radiated patter to be altered
and, hence, affect the coexistence characteristics. The deviation of the antenna main beam axis should not be
more than 0.5 degrees in either the azimuth or elevation under the following conditions. The antennas should be
designed to meet wind and ice survival ratings specified under the following conditions:

Capability Wind Velocity Ice Load

mi/hr density 43.6 lbs/ft3
Operational 70 1 in
Survival 125 1 in

Note: Hoarfrost is defined with density 19 lbs/ft3, rime ice is defined between 19 and 56 lbs/ft3, and glaze ice is
defined as 56 lbs/ft3. The specified value for density is about 66% of the difference between hoarfrost
and glaze.

5.2.3 Water Tightness

Water tightness is important in eliminating unwanted attenuation that would not necessarily be uniform over the
antenna aperture and could change the pattern and non-uniformly reduce the distance over which the BTS would
operate. For example, should radiating power be increased for part of the pattern to overcome water in the
antenna, the power applied to other parts of the pattern could be larger than required and could cause
interference problems resulting in coexistence issues.

13
2000-01-09 IEEE 802.16cc-99/21 R1

5.3. Miscellaneous Additional Elements

5.3.1 Radomes

Antennas adopting radomes shall conform to the absolute gain and radiation pattern values stipulated in the
sections above with the radome in place.

5.3.2 Heaters

For antennas adopting the use of heaters to avoid icing on the radomes, these antennas shall conform to the
absolute gain and radiation pattern values stipulated in the sections above with the heaters in place.

5.3.3 Labeling

With respect to coexistence, labeling aids in the proper installation of the antenna. Proper labeling aids in
installing the correct antenna with the correct radiation characteristics. Antennas should be clearly identified
with a weather-proof and permanent label(s) showing the antenna type, antenna frequency range, antenna
polarization, and, serial number(s). If should be noted that integrated antennas may share a common label with
the outdoor equipment.

5.3.4 Mechanical Tilting Assembly

The sector antennas described in this specification typically have a wide azimuth pattern and an narrow
elevation pattern. With respect to coexistence, the adjustment of the elevation and the cant of antenna is
deemed more important that a precision adjustment of the azimuth. The mechanical tilting assembly shall
accommodate adjustments in elevation and cant. The adjustment ranges shall allow for the following:

Adjustment Adjustment Range

Elevation ± 5o
Cant ± 2o
.
For those applications where a precision azimuth adjustment is deemed necessary, an adjustment range of ± 2o is
recommended.

14